![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 26 to 50 of 59. Go back in thread:
Posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:13:02
In reply to Re: (Yet) another perspective on love in therapy » crushedout, posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:10:13
my guess is that most aren't, but we may be closer to agreeing than you think. i just didn't like the suggestion that *all* of them are, which came across in your original post. that, i am convinced, is untrue. i can't imagine *anyone* here who would disagree with me on this but i'd love to hear it if so.
Posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:13:53
In reply to you're right » one woman cine, posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:10:22
& thank you. I appreciate that immensely.
(Not the being right part, I don't need to be right.)
Posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:15:22
In reply to Re: (Yet) another perspective on love in therapy » crushedout, posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:10:13
p.s. i suppose it's more true that you qualified--rather than backpedaled from--your first statement, to which i objected.
why on earth do i continue to be so pedantic? (please don't answer: rhetorical question.) it's satisfying but i can hardly stand myself.
Posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:17:47
In reply to Re: (Yet) another perspective on love in therapy » one woman cine, posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:13:02
I think the confusion is because I said it comes up for "every professional" but I didn't qualify the next statement by saying "most" of them are trained to handle it.
Haha, i think it does come up for every professional, just some of them are totally unprepared for it and can't handle it.
Posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:19:59
In reply to Re: (Yet) another perspective on love in therapy » crushedout, posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:17:47
that's what i've been trying to tell you in my own miserable way. :)
Posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:23:56
In reply to see! we agree! » one woman cine, posted by crushedout on December 2, 2005, at 15:19:59
Yeah,
I try to express myself concisely and accurately, besides I love words.
But speaking for myself, when something ticks me off (maybe this post initially left you PO'd) - the words get put together differently.
I'm glad you asked so we could work this out.
Posted by daisym on December 2, 2005, at 15:33:37
In reply to Re: see! we agree! » crushedout, posted by one woman cine on December 2, 2005, at 15:23:56
In talking to my therapist about this, he said he doesn't think therapist receive enough training on this, they are given lots of information about how to protect themselves from law suits and lots of information about not gratifying the client. He said after 5 years or so of practicing (aren't you glad they practice on us?!) usually one begins to really look for training on helping the client deal with the feelings and making it part of the therapy, not part of the pathology.
And he said that believe it or not, most clients never tell their therapist they are having such intense feelings. Not to imply that the therapist can't or shouldn't figure it out, they just don't bring it out into the open to talk about. He said it is often why people quit therapy, they can't stand those feelings and don't have any other way to process them. I read him Annie's post, among others, and he said he thinks she has a great therapist who is willing to say "I care about you." Again, not that most of them don't, they just aren't willing to say it.
He also reminded me that most people do not go to therapy as often as I do so they spend their time focused on the issues that brought them in, not the relationship. Did you know that the average person spends less than a year (in a row) in therapy with the same therapist?
btw, he said he was continually amazed at the articulate and respectful discussions we have here. He thinks it should be a training ground for new therapists.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:01:14
In reply to Re: see! we agree!, posted by daisym on December 2, 2005, at 15:33:37
> In talking to my therapist about this, he said he doesn't think therapist receive enough training on this, they are given lots of information about how to protect themselves from law suits and lots of information about not gratifying the client.
You know, I'm not sure I even got this type of information. We get the usual training in ethics, but I think it's almost assumed that none of *US* would *EVER* do anything wrong, so maybe that's why we didn't get that training in my program?
There's a book or video series or something that presents situations where a client is expressing love or sexual feelings to the T, and it provides opportunities for the trainee to "practice" dealing with it. I also read a great article about how this is a big hole in training and that faculty and trainees should not be afraid of broaching this topic in training. I agree.
> btw, he said he was continually amazed at the articulate and respectful discussions we have here. He thinks it should be a training ground for new therapists.
I know I learn a ton from participating here, and I thank all of you for that!
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:13:15
In reply to Re: see! we agree! » daisym, posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:01:14
Gosh, I wish we had a way to personally "flag" posts we want to follow up on but can't at the moment. At any rate, I think in another thread, someone asked me about if a client had ever expressed personal feelings for me and how I felt about it. At least I think someone asked me, d'oh!
At any rate, this did happen once a couple of years ago, when I was pretty much a novice trainee. It was a man very very different from me, and our therapy had switched from a CBT type approach to a more psychodynamic one over time. During this particular session, he appeared very uncomfortable and was hemming and hawing before he could eventually, near the very end of the session, tell me that he wished we could be "together." The entire time, I was just internally sort of "cringing" and wishing both that he would just spit it out in order to relieve the tension and that he wouldn't say it.
Once he did, I think, (I hope) I handled it with sensitivity and respect. And then I called my supervisor the next day to process it with her, since we didn't have supervision for a few more days. She was helpful in helping me sort through it on a sort of superficial level.
What made me so uncomfortable about this situation was my *OWN* issues with being viewed as a sexual being or object by someone, particulaly men. I really am uncomfortable about that, and it's something I've talked about in therapy. I had not yet begun therapy at the time, so I was very stuck in this issue without knowing much about why or how it was a problem.
The funny thing is, it turns out it was nothing sexual, and I figured that out rather quickly. This made working with this particular transference much easier for me. What he really wanted was a mother figure to take care of him. He was rather regressed and dependent, and had never had an adequate mother. Major abandonment issues.
So, that's my story. If anyone else I've worked with has had similar or sexual feelings, I have not been aware of it.
And I clearly need to do more work on my own issues in order to feel more comfortable dealing, in particular, with men in therapy who might view me sexually. For some reason, if women do, it doesn't affect me the same way. Not sure what that's about. Just feels less threatening.
Hope this isn't TMI.
gg
Posted by muffled on December 3, 2005, at 13:18:02
In reply to I think someone asked me in another thread..., posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:13:15
That was good, if somewhat challenging to read. I think its good to see things from both directions. Our T 's are people too. Thanks.
Posted by happyflower on December 3, 2005, at 13:47:55
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » gardenergirl, posted by muffled on December 3, 2005, at 13:18:02
> That was good, if somewhat challenging to read. I think its good to see things from both directions. Our T 's are people too. Thanks.
My T is far from perfect and his siblings who are also T's are a lot worse off than me, and they are T's! So they are all human, and from every background just like everyone else. Some are ethical, some wished they were, and some aren't and don't care.
Posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 14:27:36
In reply to I think someone asked me in another thread..., posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:13:15
Totally wasn't TMI. It's interesting. I bet it is common for female therapists to be more comfortable with female desire than male desire, and that makes total sense to me. Male desire, historically, is much more threatening. Any many women have personal histories that make it threatening to them in particular.
I wondered about this when I told my therapist about my feelings for her. Funny thing is, I told her that I worried I was making her feeling objectified, the way men often make me feel. She clearly didn't feel so, however, and I guessed that that may have been partly due to the fact that I was a woman. Somehow, it feels less objectifying to be desired by a woman, or is it that being objectified by a woman feels less uncomfortable? Just wondering aloud.
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 3, 2005, at 16:33:25
In reply to I think someone asked me in another thread..., posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:13:15
> Gosh, I wish we had a way to personally "flag" posts we want to follow up on but can't at the moment.
Bookmark them?
Bob
Posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 16:36:05
In reply to Re: a way to personally flag posts, posted by Dr. Bob on December 3, 2005, at 16:33:25
i thought sher poeple meant so that other people would know she was planning to respond.
Posted by Pfinstegg on December 3, 2005, at 17:53:30
In reply to I think someone asked me in another thread..., posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 13:13:15
Responding to an earlier part of this thread, I was startled when my analyst offered the information that he never spoke about his patients to his wife in any way- not by disguising their identity, or making general comments- just in no way at all. My immediate thought was that it must be quite hard and un-natural, but, as I thought about it more, I realized that it is the utmost in respect, security and privacy that a therapist can give- sort of like having a husband with top secret clearance (which I have!) I don't know what it is that I don't know..
Posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 17:56:32
In reply to Re: a way to personally flag posts » Dr. Bob, posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 16:36:05
typing malfunction. i was trying to writei thought she meant so that other people would know she was planning to respond.
> i thought sher poeple meant so that other people would know she was planning to respond.
Posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 17:58:18
In reply to What they say about us to their spouses.., posted by Pfinstegg on December 3, 2005, at 17:53:30
I agree, Pfinstegg, that does seem very respectful of the clients and I truly believe it's the right thing to do. Not sure I could do it myself, but that's part of why I'm not a therapist. And I'm sure not all therapists can or do do that (or perhaps think it's necessary or important), but I bet yours really does.> Responding to an earlier part of this thread, I was startled when my analyst offered the information that he never spoke about his patients to his wife in any way- not by disguising their identity, or making general comments- just in no way at all. My immediate thought was that it must be quite hard and un-natural, but, as I thought about it more, I realized that it is the utmost in respect, security and privacy that a therapist can give- sort of like having a husband with top secret clearance (which I have!) I don't know what it is that I don't know..
Posted by happyflower on December 3, 2005, at 18:33:44
In reply to What they say about us to their spouses.., posted by Pfinstegg on December 3, 2005, at 17:53:30
My T told me in one of my first sessions that he tries not to bring his "work" home with him, which means he tries not to talk about his clients even to his wife.
Posted by daisym on December 3, 2005, at 19:44:29
In reply to Re: What they say about us to their spouses.. » Pfinstegg, posted by happyflower on December 3, 2005, at 18:33:44
I'm sure it depends somewhat on personality and on who they have to process stuff with. Since my therapist is in practice with partners, one of whom is his wife, I'm sure they "case conference" to some extent, just as a practical matter. Some of you may remember that last year at this time I had the experience of walking into the waiting room and there was a friend of mine and her daughter. The daughter was seeing one of the partners. It bothered me a lot, which surprised me since my friend knew about my therapist. But what really upset me was when the other therapist referred them for family therapy to my therapist's wife. I just couldn't handle it but I also felt horrible for being so selfish. My therapist asked for my permission to talk to his wife about it before the other family got started with her (I told him about the referral before they even called) and ultimately it didn't work out in her schedule. But it was sticky -- and I hated that they needed to talk about me.
I do know as someone who supervises home visitors that it is important to talk about the work that is happening with clients so that any frustrations or over involvement with a family can be dealt with. Still - I hate the thought of having my feelings discussed with detachment and clinical terms. I'd rather not think about it.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 22:49:12
In reply to Re: a way to personally flag posts, posted by Dr. Bob on December 3, 2005, at 16:33:25
I'll give that a try, thanks.
And crushed, actually, I was thinking of how I flag emails as a note to myself for later follow up. Although since I'm not so good at getting back to them, maybe it's not such a good idea.
I need a better system or more time. :(
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 22:50:22
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » gardenergirl, posted by muffled on December 3, 2005, at 13:18:02
> That was good, if somewhat challenging to read. I think its good to see things from both directions. Our T 's are people too. Thanks.
Just curious, but what made it challenging? Sometimes I worry that I ramble too much, and it gets to hard to follow. (Just ask Racer, my conversations are like that, too!)
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 22:51:21
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » muffled, posted by happyflower on December 3, 2005, at 13:47:55
>So they are all human, and from every background just like everyone else. Some are ethical, some wished they were, and some aren't and don't care.
Which is unfortunate. I suppose we could also add: Some don't know they are not ethical. :(
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 22:53:06
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » gardenergirl, posted by crushedout on December 3, 2005, at 14:27:36
> Male desire, historically, is much more threatening. Any many women have personal histories that make it threatening to them in particular.
Yeah, that's part of it for me, unfortunately.
>
> Somehow, it feels less objectifying to be desired by a woman, or is it that being objectified by a woman feels less uncomfortable? Just wondering aloud.I wonder if perhaps it's that women are more likely (in a general sense) to be emotionally engaged. That might cut into the objectifying aspect enough to overcome it?
gg
Posted by muffled on December 4, 2005, at 0:51:42
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » muffled, posted by gardenergirl on December 3, 2005, at 22:50:22
> > That was good, if somewhat challenging to read. I think its good to see things from both directions. Our T 's are people too. Thanks.
>
> Just curious, but what made it challenging? Sometimes I worry that I ramble too much, and it gets to hard to follow. (Just ask Racer, my conversations are like that, too!)
>
***Not sure. Maybe more than one thing. Proly mostly T safety. I worry bout my T's safety. Her office is a little isolated. We have touched on this ever so briefly before.
My T is very nice. Wouldn't want her to get hurt is all.
That a man client would view her as meat bothers me. I think I just get too protective of others. I worry too much.
Muffled
Posted by gardenergirl on December 4, 2005, at 12:47:04
In reply to Re: I think someone asked me in another thread... » gardenergirl, posted by muffled on December 4, 2005, at 0:51:42
Thanks for explaining. That's actually one thing that a few supervisors HAVE done a good job with...making sure that I am aware of my surroundings and such in the event that there is some kind of threat. When I did testing on a regular basis, we were always reminded to sit closest to the door so that we could get out of the room quickly if need be.
But I do understand the worry. Sounds like you care about your T a lot. :)
gg
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.